12 ms·

Most annoyingly, as someone who lives in Oregon I don't want to pay for this. I certainly want the poor guy who tried to fix something broken to be hugely compe

Most annoyingly, as someone who lives in Oregon I don't want to pay for this. I certainly want the poor guy who tried to fix something broken to be hugely compensated. However, I want whoever did this to pay for it. I also want then to stop focusing traffic tickets on speeding and instead fine people who cause traffic jams by not accelerating when entering the freeway or go unnecessary slow. But well that's of course never gonna happen and probably most native Oregonians would be fine constantly because they drive insanely slow...

uniformlyrandom 9y ago
> most native Oregonians would be fine constantly because they drive insanely slow And this is why they do not want you to drive slow. The difference of speed between cars is what causes accidents. This is why speed limits are raised based on 90th percentile speeds. And this is why everyone in California drives 80 in 65, and CHP are apparently OK with that.
- flyinghamster 9y ago
  75-80 in a 65 (or even 55) is common in the Chicago area too, except in traffic jams. If you're not going at least 70 when you merge onto the highway, you're gonna get run down. I think the cops are fine with it, since it provides a perfect pretext for a traffic stop if they want you for some other reason.
  - briffle 9y ago
    Chicago's freeways have two speeds, 35 and 80, and they switch between the two in 100 yards or less..
- davidgay 9y ago
  > The difference of speed between cars is what causes accidents. A cause, but most definitely not the cause. There's the not-so-trivial factors of reaction time (separation / speed) and breaking distance (proportional to the square of the speed) too. And many other factors too, of course.
- subhobroto 9y ago
  > why everyone in California drives 80 in 65, and CHP are apparently OK with that. Absolutely untrue. My wife was ticketed by the CHP for driving at 80 on an empty I5 early in the morning. There was no traffic and she was the only other car on that stretch of the I5 at that time. We seriously considered figting the ticket but I was unable to collect any data to prove that 90 percentile of the traffic drives at 80 although that's my own observation. The ticket was cited using PACING and the officer did not have a recently calibrated odometer which gave us an upperhand but that would not be enough to dismiss the case. We also researched and found out that the AAA lobbies to keep statutory speed limits down at 65 wherever a higher speed is proposed. We then considered the pros of paying $500 for a ticket and traffic school vs paying thousands in insurance premiums for the next few years. We ended up paying $500. 65 is the statutory speed limit barring higher prima facie limits. Any higher speed is illegal. Not getting a ticket while driving at 80 does not mean the CHP is OK with it, just that there are far more drivers than CHP officers. PS: If anyone knows how to strike a deal with the prosecutor/DA's office without getting an attorney involved for trivial traffic tickets like this, I am all ears.
  - gamblor956 9y ago
    The ticket was cited using PACING and the officer did not have a recently calibrated odometer which gave us an upperhand but that would not be enough to dismiss the case. For future reference, that would have been enough to get the ticket dismissed. Tickets must be based on calibrated range speedometers, not the officer's odometer. Also, the DA generally doesn't negotiate traffic tickets. It's not worth their time. Simply contest the ticket, since the worst case scenario is you get the same punishment you would have gotten if you hadn't fought the ticket.
    - subhobroto 9y ago
      > For future reference, that would have been enough to get the ticket dismissed. Tickets must be based on calibrated range speedometers, not the officer's odometer. That is incorrect. PACING (officer's odometer) is accepted by the court. If you can provide any case/regulation that refutes this, I will pay you money for the lead. > since the worst case scenario is you get the same punishment you would have gotten if you hadn't fought the ticket. Again, that is incorrect. Traffic school can be refused by the judge if defendant contests the ticket If you can provide any case/regulation that refutes this, I will pay you money for the lead. Here is a case that even with citing Wozniak (http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/197/supp43.html http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/19...), it clearly states that the court has discretion to allow or deny traffic school and is under no obligation to disclose the reasons why People v. Schindler, 20 Cal. App. 4th 431 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate Dist., 4th Div (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1770113.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1770113.html, http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/20/431.html http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/2...) Under section 42005, the court may order traffic school. Although the court may not arbitrarily refuse to entertain a request for traffic school merely because a defendant elects to plead not guilty (People v. Wozniak (1987) 197 Cal. App.3d Supp. 43 [243 Cal. Rptr. 686]; People v. Enochs (1976) 62 Cal. App.3d Supp. 42 [133 Cal. Rptr. 363]), the court otherwise has discretion to grant or not grant traffic school for a traffic violation. (People v. Levinson (1984) 155 Cal. App.3d Supp. 13, 21 [203 Cal. Rptr. 426].)[2] Nothing in section 42005 requires the court to state its reasons for granting or rejecting traffic school. When I turn up at court, I am informed. I don't believe in crossing fingers, working off "intuition" or "hoping that the officer does not show up"
manyxcxi 9y ago
Growing up in Oregon I was always annoyed by the slow as hell left lane campers. Having spent a half decade elsewhere and recently moving back it has escalated from annoyance to blood boiling seething rage. When I left Seattle, the state of WA was really making a push to get slowpokes out of the left lane with a media campaign and instituting tickets for people who are slowing traffic down. I LOVE the idea.
- vvanders 9y ago
  Yeah, they've started to ticket people for this lately and it's been a god-send. Since the port shut down in Portland I see so much stupid stuff on I-5 as the increased semi traffic + left-lane campers can turn the 2-3 lanes into a gridlock and cause all sorts of dangerous situations.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  >hell left lane campers. It's 2017. We have cameras, "repeated failure to move right for faster traffic" should not be a hard ticket to write to a high standard of proof.
  - dawnerd 9y ago
    It kinda turns into the problem (if you want to call it that) in California where you must keep up with traffic but you also must not go over posted speed limits. Basically putting you always in violation of a law if they really wanted to get you. My biggest gripe about drivers in Oregon is the people that zip in and out of lanes at high speeds without signaling and the amount of people in city traffic that simply don’t look where they’re going.
    - slededit 9y ago
      Just stay in the right lane if everyone else is speeding and you don't want to. Oregon has minimum speed limits too though.
      - overhang 9y ago
simook 9y ago
Going faster does not improve the speed of traffic. Matter of fact if everyone drove the actual speed limit we wouldn't have such a bad trafffic problem. Our infranstructure was designed to handle a range of speeds, primarily for the timing systems. When people drive outside those limits, that's when traffic patterns become unpredictable and/or unmanageable. The slow drivers are no different than the fast drivers. Both of you are outliers and aren't easy to calculate in the timing algorithms. imo, people are selfish when it comes to driving.
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  > The slow drivers are no different than the fast drivers Bingo. You should be pissed at people who don't drive the speed limit.
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    Change that to median roadway speed, and I'll be on board. Speed limits are too often set by clueless folk for political concerns, rather than by traffic engineers for maximum throughput for a given safety factor. There should be some allowance for ensuring that the median speeds of adjacent lanes have a good range separation. I can't even count how many times I have seen a tractor-trailer in the left lane at 70 mph passing a tractor-trailer in the right lane at 69 mph, as passenger cars stack up behind them. It creates a dangerous situation that I can only avoid by slowing down or exiting the roadway. Speed limits should apply only to the rightmost lane, and additional lanes should be between 5 and 15 mph faster than the current speed of traffic in the lane to their right, regardless of their absolute speed. It makes sense, and it would improve traffic flow, but it can't become law because it would be too complicated for cops to enforce.
    - overhang 9y ago
      > I can't even count how many times I have seen a tractor-trailer in the left lane at 70 mph passing a tractor-trailer in the right lane at 69 mph, as passenger cars stack up behind them. It creates a dangerous situation that I can only avoid by slowing down or exiting the roadway. Presuming the max speed was 70mph, your post epitomizes the real danger. Traffic should not stack up behind vehicles traveling at the maximum allowed speed. Or at least, it should not stack up in a dangerous way. Twenty vehicles stacked up at proper following distances, all traveling 70mph, is actually optimal. Yet you seem to disparage it. You will never achieve optimal traffic flow if the general attitude toward actual optimal patterns is disdain. If the max speed limit was above 70mph, ignore the preceding paragraph.
amyjess 9y ago
If the voting body has the option to vote people into office who will overhaul the state government or vote in amendments to that effect, the illegal actions of the state is 100% the citizens' responsibility. Everyone in the state who is able to vote should be collectively punished severely to give them an incentive to vote to change their government.

uniformlyrandom 9y ago

> most native Oregonians would be fine constantly because they drive insanely slow And this is why they do not want you to drive slow. The difference of speed between cars is what causes accidents. This is why speed limits are raised based on 90th percentile speeds. And this is why everyone in California drives 80 in 65, and CHP are apparently OK with that.

flyinghamster 9y ago
75-80 in a 65 (or even 55) is common in the Chicago area too, except in traffic jams. If you're not going at least 70 when you merge onto the highway, you're gonna get run down. I think the cops are fine with it, since it provides a perfect pretext for a traffic stop if they want you for some other reason.
- briffle 9y ago
  Chicago's freeways have two speeds, 35 and 80, and they switch between the two in 100 yards or less..
davidgay 9y ago
> The difference of speed between cars is what causes accidents. A cause, but most definitely not the cause. There's the not-so-trivial factors of reaction time (separation / speed) and breaking distance (proportional to the square of the speed) too. And many other factors too, of course.
subhobroto 9y ago
> why everyone in California drives 80 in 65, and CHP are apparently OK with that. Absolutely untrue. My wife was ticketed by the CHP for driving at 80 on an empty I5 early in the morning. There was no traffic and she was the only other car on that stretch of the I5 at that time. We seriously considered figting the ticket but I was unable to collect any data to prove that 90 percentile of the traffic drives at 80 although that's my own observation. The ticket was cited using PACING and the officer did not have a recently calibrated odometer which gave us an upperhand but that would not be enough to dismiss the case. We also researched and found out that the AAA lobbies to keep statutory speed limits down at 65 wherever a higher speed is proposed. We then considered the pros of paying $500 for a ticket and traffic school vs paying thousands in insurance premiums for the next few years. We ended up paying $500. 65 is the statutory speed limit barring higher prima facie limits. Any higher speed is illegal. Not getting a ticket while driving at 80 does not mean the CHP is OK with it, just that there are far more drivers than CHP officers. PS: If anyone knows how to strike a deal with the prosecutor/DA's office without getting an attorney involved for trivial traffic tickets like this, I am all ears.
- gamblor956 9y ago
  The ticket was cited using PACING and the officer did not have a recently calibrated odometer which gave us an upperhand but that would not be enough to dismiss the case. For future reference, that would have been enough to get the ticket dismissed. Tickets must be based on calibrated range speedometers, not the officer's odometer. Also, the DA generally doesn't negotiate traffic tickets. It's not worth their time. Simply contest the ticket, since the worst case scenario is you get the same punishment you would have gotten if you hadn't fought the ticket.
  - subhobroto 9y ago
    > For future reference, that would have been enough to get the ticket dismissed. Tickets must be based on calibrated range speedometers, not the officer's odometer. That is incorrect. PACING (officer's odometer) is accepted by the court. If you can provide any case/regulation that refutes this, I will pay you money for the lead. > since the worst case scenario is you get the same punishment you would have gotten if you hadn't fought the ticket. Again, that is incorrect. Traffic school can be refused by the judge if defendant contests the ticket If you can provide any case/regulation that refutes this, I will pay you money for the lead. Here is a case that even with citing Wozniak (http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/197/supp43.html http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/19...), it clearly states that the court has discretion to allow or deny traffic school and is under no obligation to disclose the reasons why People v. Schindler, 20 Cal. App. 4th 431 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate Dist., 4th Div (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1770113.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1770113.html, http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/20/431.html http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/2...) Under section 42005, the court may order traffic school. Although the court may not arbitrarily refuse to entertain a request for traffic school merely because a defendant elects to plead not guilty (People v. Wozniak (1987) 197 Cal. App.3d Supp. 43 [243 Cal. Rptr. 686]; People v. Enochs (1976) 62 Cal. App.3d Supp. 42 [133 Cal. Rptr. 363]), the court otherwise has discretion to grant or not grant traffic school for a traffic violation. (People v. Levinson (1984) 155 Cal. App.3d Supp. 13, 21 [203 Cal. Rptr. 426].)[2] Nothing in section 42005 requires the court to state its reasons for granting or rejecting traffic school. When I turn up at court, I am informed. I don't believe in crossing fingers, working off "intuition" or "hoping that the officer does not show up"

manyxcxi 9y ago

Growing up in Oregon I was always annoyed by the slow as hell left lane campers. Having spent a half decade elsewhere and recently moving back it has escalated from annoyance to blood boiling seething rage. When I left Seattle, the state of WA was really making a push to get slowpokes out of the left lane with a media campaign and instituting tickets for people who are slowing traffic down. I LOVE the idea.

vvanders 9y ago
Yeah, they've started to ticket people for this lately and it's been a god-send. Since the port shut down in Portland I see so much stupid stuff on I-5 as the increased semi traffic + left-lane campers can turn the 2-3 lanes into a gridlock and cause all sorts of dangerous situations.
dsfyu404ed 9y ago
>hell left lane campers. It's 2017. We have cameras, "repeated failure to move right for faster traffic" should not be a hard ticket to write to a high standard of proof.
- dawnerd 9y ago
  It kinda turns into the problem (if you want to call it that) in California where you must keep up with traffic but you also must not go over posted speed limits. Basically putting you always in violation of a law if they really wanted to get you. My biggest gripe about drivers in Oregon is the people that zip in and out of lanes at high speeds without signaling and the amount of people in city traffic that simply don’t look where they’re going.
  - slededit 9y ago
    Just stay in the right lane if everyone else is speeding and you don't want to. Oregon has minimum speed limits too though.
    - overhang 9y ago

simook 9y ago

Going faster does not improve the speed of traffic. Matter of fact if everyone drove the actual speed limit we wouldn't have such a bad trafffic problem. Our infranstructure was designed to handle a range of speeds, primarily for the timing systems. When people drive outside those limits, that's when traffic patterns become unpredictable and/or unmanageable. The slow drivers are no different than the fast drivers. Both of you are outliers and aren't easy to calculate in the timing algorithms. imo, people are selfish when it comes to driving.

throwawayjava 9y ago
> The slow drivers are no different than the fast drivers Bingo. You should be pissed at people who don't drive the speed limit.
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  Change that to median roadway speed, and I'll be on board. Speed limits are too often set by clueless folk for political concerns, rather than by traffic engineers for maximum throughput for a given safety factor. There should be some allowance for ensuring that the median speeds of adjacent lanes have a good range separation. I can't even count how many times I have seen a tractor-trailer in the left lane at 70 mph passing a tractor-trailer in the right lane at 69 mph, as passenger cars stack up behind them. It creates a dangerous situation that I can only avoid by slowing down or exiting the roadway. Speed limits should apply only to the rightmost lane, and additional lanes should be between 5 and 15 mph faster than the current speed of traffic in the lane to their right, regardless of their absolute speed. It makes sense, and it would improve traffic flow, but it can't become law because it would be too complicated for cops to enforce.
  - overhang 9y ago
    > I can't even count how many times I have seen a tractor-trailer in the left lane at 70 mph passing a tractor-trailer in the right lane at 69 mph, as passenger cars stack up behind them. It creates a dangerous situation that I can only avoid by slowing down or exiting the roadway. Presuming the max speed was 70mph, your post epitomizes the real danger. Traffic should not stack up behind vehicles traveling at the maximum allowed speed. Or at least, it should not stack up in a dangerous way. Twenty vehicles stacked up at proper following distances, all traveling 70mph, is actually optimal. Yet you seem to disparage it. You will never achieve optimal traffic flow if the general attitude toward actual optimal patterns is disdain. If the max speed limit was above 70mph, ignore the preceding paragraph.

amyjess 9y ago

If the voting body has the option to vote people into office who will overhaul the state government or vote in amendments to that effect, the illegal actions of the state is 100% the citizens' responsibility. Everyone in the state who is able to vote should be collectively punished severely to give them an incentive to vote to change their government.